(This article is written primarily for Alexander Technique teachers).
An integral part of my job as an Alexander Technique teacher is to explain what the Technique is and how it works. I always try to find new ways of explaining things. Literature on the Technique is a source of inspiration. Sometimes I come across ideas that are good, others that are not so good, and sometimes ideas that are intriguing.
An integral part of my job as an Alexander Technique teacher is to explain what the Technique is and how it works. I always try to find new ways of explaining things. Literature on the Technique is a source of inspiration. Sometimes I come across ideas that are good, others that are not so good, and sometimes ideas that are intriguing.
In her book The Actor's Secret, which in my view is a fairly good book on Alexander Technique for drama students, Betsy Polatin writes:
We live in a gravitational field, and therefore we are subjected to the forces of both gravity and antigravity. The force of gravity pulls us toward the earth, and the spinning of the earth creates an opposite, centrifugal force pushing outward. While gravity may give a downward, grounding pull, antigravity influences everything with an upward direction, including plants, trees and human beings (Polatin 2013 p.45).
Gravity and the centrifugal force creates "suspension and support" according to Polatin:
The intersection of these two forces creates suspension and support in the body. As you allow your neck to be free, your head frees upward so that your torso lengthens and widens. The rest of your body releases slightly downward toward the ground. The ground then supports you, and that support carries up through your legs, your spine, and your head. The forces of gravity and antigravity act on your body to create suspension from the top of your head, and support moving through your feet from the ground (ibid).
In her more recent book, Humanual she presents the same concept:
We live in a gravitational field, including gravity and antigravity, and we need to adapt to that field to be upright. … Gravity aims down with a centripetal force towards the centre of the Earth, while the spinning planet emanates a centrifugal force away from the planet called antigravity (Polatin 2020, p.101).
Naturally, Polatin thinks the centrifugal force has a role to play in how we use ourselves, and that it is relevant to Alexander Technique hands-on teaching:
How do you feel your own weight? It is a delicate balance between the centrifugal force (antigravity) coming up from the Earth, and the centripetal force (gravity) coming downward toward the Earth. This means you would feel weightless if you were simply allowing the universal forces to act. This is sometimes hard to feel unless you have had a direct (hands-on) experience of this with a qualified Alexander Technique teacher, or some other skilled practitioner who could help you experience yourself this way (Polatin 2020 p.222).
Where on Earth
The educated reader will have spotted Polatin's mistakes. But I find her attempts at explaining our experiences intriguing. If we define gravity as a centripetal force we could indeed say there is a centrifugal force working in the opposite direction. Polatin gives a quote in Humanual:
I find it fascinating that our bodies are so affected by the planet. Take, for example, this little nugget of information from a space science archive: "If the Earth were not spinning, you would be heavier, as you would feel the whole force of gravity. Since there is more centrifugal force at the equator to cancel gravity, your overall weight at the equator versus at the poles is even less. If you weighted 100 pounds at the North Pole on a spring scale, at the equator you would weigh 99.65 pounds, or 5.5 ounces less" (Polatin 2020 p.104).
As an Alexander Technique teacher I wonder if this means the technique works best at the equator, and not at the poles, (where there is no centrifugal force). And what about us living at 60 degrees north?
Understanding the physics
Contrary to what you might think at this point, Polatin does seem to understand the basic physics. In Humanual, (which is strictly speaking not a book on the Alexander Technique, albeit heavily influenced by it), Polatin writes:
It is less known that physicist Isaac Newton, in his later years, conceived of gravity as a mutual attraction between the mass of objects. In other words, because of gravity, objects act in relationship to one another, not independent from one another. This gravity is intrinsic to the interaction between two or more objects. There is some gravitational force between you and the sofa, or the planet and the sofa. In fact, there is gravity between every object in the entire universe and every other object. … In truth, without gravity we would be floating in space like astronauts. Gravity gives us the mutual attraction of an equal pulling of two objects towards each other (Polatin 2020 p.219).
I have not been able to verify whether Newton actually changed his theory, but Polatin is correct that gravity is always equal and opposite. And, as far as we now, that it works at infinite distances, although it is extremely weak compared to other forces.
Polatin also have an understanding of the ground reaction force. In The Actor's Secret she writes:
As much weight or mass as I put down into the earth, the earth matches that mass with an upward force. … The analogy is easy to see if we use water, another surface on the earth, instead of land. Picture a boat floating on the water. The boat is supported by the exact amount of force that it exerts on the water. Thus we say it is floating. Given this analogy, it is interesting to note that one of the common phrases spoken after an Alexander session is, ''I feel like I'm floating" (Polatin 2013 p.45).
I think this is a neat explanation. Although we are not floating objects, it gives us an idea of supporting force. I use a similar explanation when discussing the concept of support with pupils. I ask them to consider the fact that they can't walk on water, (at least as far as I know), but they can walk on ice. The surface meets our weight with an equal and opposite force.
It can be useful to imagine that this force or "support" is travelling up through the body, as Polatin describes:
Obviously, the ground is under you, but it might not be so obvious that the ground is under you and supporting you. Let the support come up through you. Receive it all the way up. … Feel the support rise up through ankles, knees, hips, whole back, torso, arms, neck, and head. Then let your head turn, and see what the world look like with support from the ground (Polatin 2020 p.104. See also Polatin 2013 p.51).
This way of thinking can be particularly useful for people who tend towards hypermobility. We should be careful, however, to point out that this is something we imagine. The contact forces always being equal and opposite means they are not actually moving up or down.
We should have the same caution regarding Polatin's centrifugal force. It may be inspiring and practically useful for some to imagine being levitated by such a force, but what Polatin suggests doesn't make sense.
Not making sense
In Humanual, Polatin claims:
We all get the support from the same place - the centrifugal force from the spinning of Earth is the "up" pressure from the ground (Polatin 2020 p.241).
This is not correct. Polatin confuses centrifugal force with the ground reaction force. This is odd, because they are inversely correlated. if we increase the centrifugal force, we decrease the ground reaction force, or "support" from the ground. At the poles there is no centrifugal force, we weigh a little bit more and there will be a higher ground reaction force. But according to Polatin, there will be no support from the ground at the poles!
Polatin is also mixing up different pairs of forces. She combines the "down" of gravity with the "up" of the ground reaction force. These are two different forces acting on the same body. Newton's third law is about equal and opposite forces between two bodies (as for instance your body and the Earth).
Gravity makes up one pair of forces, consisting of equal and opposite pulls between your body and the earth. Then you have contact forces like the ground reaction force. Standing still, it is equal to your weight. It is local, so while there will be gravity at work between the whole of the Earth and the whole of your body, the ground reaction force acts only between your feet and the ground. (There are other contact forces inside your body, of course, which gradually diminishes towards your head as the weight from above diminishes).
Gravity makes up one pair of forces, consisting of equal and opposite pulls between your body and the earth. Then you have contact forces like the ground reaction force. Standing still, it is equal to your weight. It is local, so while there will be gravity at work between the whole of the Earth and the whole of your body, the ground reaction force acts only between your feet and the ground. (There are other contact forces inside your body, of course, which gradually diminishes towards your head as the weight from above diminishes).
We could say, as Polatin does, that there is a third pair of forces, the centripetal and centrifugal forces. Gravity can be seen as acting like a centripetal force, and because of Earth's rotation we could say there is an opposite centrifugal force. But these are not equal. For the centrifugal force to cancel out gravity, the Earth would have to rotate approximately 17 times faster. This will be the effect at the equator only. The centrifugal force at the poles would still be zero.
A vitalistic centrifugal force
Interestingly, the centrifugal force doesn't actually exist. It is a "fictional" or "pseudo force". Polatin sometimes labels the centrifugal force "antigravity". (See for instance Polatin 2013 p.45; Polatin 2020, p.101, and p.222). As far as we know today, antigravity doesn't exist either.
Polatin writes about the centrifugal force almost as if it is something tangible and material: "… the spinning planet emanates a centrifugal force away from the planet" (Polatin 2020 p.101). It is "pushing outward" (Polatin 2013 p.45), "moving from the planet Earth toward the sun" (Polatin 2020 p.104). The extensor muscles "lift the body upward, away from the spinning centrifugal forces of Earth" (ibid p.22). Likewise, gravity seems to be "the force of outer space (ibid). "coming downward toward the Earth" (ibid p.222). Polatin asks the reader to "[r]emember the mutual attraction between gravity and the earth" (Polatin 2013 p.203).
She also likens the centrifugal force with "air gases":
In the image from space, Earth looks like a big balloon with a thin crust upon which we live. The air gases in that balloon are pushing outward, and we feel that as support (Polatin 2020 p.241).
I believe these description stems from Polatin's vitalist worldview. Vitalism is a main ingredient in Polatin's book Humanual in which the "life-force" plays a central part:
All the bodily functions … constitute one large network carrying out multiple individual roles to … keep the organisms life-force thriving and resilient (Polatin 2020 p.xxvi).
Polatin carries this concept into her physics. She claims gravity and the centrifugal force ("antigravity") is "the energetic connection between heaven and earth" (Polatin 2020 p.210). Posture is "based on the interaction and flow between gravity and antigravity, and our human reflexes" (ibid p.146). You receive the support from the centrifugal force as you "plug into Earth" (ibid p.104). "When a connection is made, the energy from the earth spreads up your legs, into your torso and arms, through your neck and head, and out into the world" (ibid p.137).
At the beginning of Humanual she declares:
Everything is connected energetically, according to ancient wisdom as well as modern neuroscience and quantum physics research (ibid p.11).
Previously I have written about vitalism in Alexander's writings. Polatin is an example of vitalism among present day Alexander Technique teachers. Many influential teachers of the technique have been vitalists. A vitalist view seems to go well with the day to day practical work. But when trying to explain the technique in a more "scientific" way, it can, as we have seen, go terribly wrong.
We all make mistakes
We read in the author's biography at the end of Humanual:
Betsy leads international trainings where she presents her unique and revolutionary fusion of ideas: scientific knowledge combined with ancient wisdom and intuitive human creativity (Polatin 2020 p.259).
Polatin is definitely creative. The common mistake is to confuse ground reaction force with gravity. Confusing it with the centrifugal force is very original.
Polatin's knowledge and understanding of the science of physics is limited. Invoking quantum physics, as she does in the beginning of Humanual, is a particularly typical sign of ignorance.
Her strong side seems to be knowledge and insights into emotions and trauma. She has for many years collaborated with Peter A Levine, the founder of "Somatic Experiencing". Her insights are apparent in both The Actor's Secret and Humanual. As mentioned before, The Actor's Secret is a fairly good book for drama students. Humanual contains many "EX-plorations" and "EX-ercises" that can be useful for anyone.
It is a shame that these books are tainted by factual errors. They deserve better. I don't think we should put all the blame for the mistakes on Polatin. The fact that Polatin could make a mistake in a book published in 2013 and then not only repeat the error, but elaborate on it, in another book seven years later, is a symptom of a general problem within the Alexander Technique teacher profession: too little scientific literacy and too little critical thinking.
Related blog posts
Links
Literature
Polatin, Betsy (2013) The Actors Secret: Techniques for Transforming Habitual Patterns and Improving Performance. North Atlantic Books.
Polatin, Betsy (2020) Humanual: A Manual for Being Human. Waterside Productions.
